Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the data for the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D paired with the Intel Arc B390 paints a clear picture of a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings are low, indicating that this combination is not suitable for a smooth flight simulation experience at standard display settings. The CPU is a top-tier performer, but the GPU’s output is the limiting factor in every single benchmark row, resulting in a configuration that struggles to maintain playable fluidity.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 56, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only measured scenario where the system approaches a playable level, though it still falls short of the 60 FPS target many simmers prefer.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B390's average benchmark score is 1482. It is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, 2.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710. These rivals are all legacy or entry-level parts, confirming the B390's position at the very bottom of the performance stack.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D a high-performance processor?

A: Yes. The CPU's average benchmark score is 39768, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. It is 0.4% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS and 0.7% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450, while being 0.7% slower than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 and 0.8% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 7700.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset yields an average of 45 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields an average of 25 FPS. This represents a 20 FPS drop, or a 44% reduction in average frame rate, when moving from the lowest to the highest visual quality preset.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B390 have its own dedicated video memory?

A: No. The GPU's memory configuration is listed as "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's main DDR5 memory rather than having its own dedicated VRAM. Its memory bandwidth is also listed as "System Dependent."

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations for this game?

A: The combination ranks 2665th out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom 11% of all configurations, indicating very poor relative performance for this specific title.

Settings Recommendations

The data from the measured FPS rows provides a clear directive: prioritize the Low preset to achieve the only remotely acceptable performance. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system produces an average of 56 FPS. While this is below the ideal 60 FPS threshold, it is the only configuration point where the frame rate is in a playable range for a flight simulator, which can tolerate lower frame rates better than fast-paced action games. Moving to Medium at 1080p drops the average to 43 FPS, a significant 13 FPS loss that will be noticeable during flight.

At higher resolutions, the situation becomes more challenging. At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average FPS falls to 45, and at 3840x2160 with Low settings, it drops further to 33 FPS. The data indicates that the Low preset is the only viable option for a consistent experience, and even then, users at 4K will face a compromised simulation. The Medium preset is not recommended as the minimum FPS values of 22 at 4K and 30 at 1440p suggest potential stutters and frame pacing issues during complex scenes. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over smoothness, the High and Ultra presets result in average frame rates in the 19-33 FPS range, which is generally considered unplayable for a smooth experience. The benchmark results strongly suggest that this GPU is not capable of handling this game's higher graphical loads, and users should set expectations accordingly.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the primary bottleneck in this configuration. Its performance is defined by a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, which places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals for this GPU are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710, all of which are from a much older generation and represent the lowest tier of performance. This context is crucial: the B390 is not just a low-end current part; it is performing in the same league as decade-old entry-level mobile and OEM graphics solutions.

The GPU's architecture is Xe3-LPG, built on a 3 nm process, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. It features 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. However, its memory configuration is its most significant weakness for this game. The B390 uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM. The memory bandwidth is "System Dependent," which in practice means it is sharing the system's DDR5 memory bus. For a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data, the lack of dedicated high-bandwidth memory is a severe handicap. The GPU's pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, but these figures cannot compensate for the memory bottleneck. The data shows that the GPU's limitations are the direct cause of the low FPS at every resolution and setting combination.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2665 out of 2996 tested combinations places it in the lowest 11% of all systems tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a very poor result, and the data suggests that the CPU is not the contributing factor to this low rank. The CPU is a top-tier performer, but it is paired with a GPU that is in the 9th percentile. The combination of a high-end CPU and a very low-end GPU results in a massively unbalanced system for this workload. The frame rates are consistently low, regardless of resolution, which indicates a hard bottleneck at the GPU level.

When examining the measured FPS, the pattern is unmistakable. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 56 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, it drops to 31 FPS. At 1440p Low, it achieves 45 FPS, and at 4K Low, it achieves 33 FPS. These numbers show that even at the lowest settings, the system cannot maintain a high frame rate, and the scaling from Low to Ultra is consistent with a GPU that is severely underpowered. The rank is a reflection of this fundamental imbalance. A system with a more capable GPU would rank much higher with this CPU, but as configured, the Arc B390 drags the entire combination to the bottom of the leaderboard.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a flagship-class processor and is not the limiting factor in this configuration. It features 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. Its performance is demonstrated by an average benchmark score of 39768, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. In multi-threaded workloads, it scores 23230 points in Cinebench R23, and in single-threaded tests, it scores 2080 points. The CPU also features a large 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is beneficial for gaming.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to handle the simulation's complex physics, flight model, and AI traffic. The data shows that the CPU is more than capable of handling these tasks. The frame rates are consistently low across all settings, which would not be the case if the CPU were the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see a significant increase in FPS when lowering the resolution from 4K to 1080p. While there is an increase, it is not proportional to the massive reduction in pixel count, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU is providing frames as fast as the GPU can render them, but the GPU's rendering speed is too slow. The 9800X3D is a powerful and capable processor, but its performance is completely wasted in this pairing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data shows a linear and predictable decline in performance as resolution and settings increase, with the GPU being the sole limiting factor.

At 1920x1080, the system achieves its best results. With the Low preset, the average FPS is 56. Moving to Medium drops the average to 43 FPS, with minimum and maximum values of 37 and 50 FPS, respectively. The High preset yields an average of 33 FPS, and the Ultra preset produces an average of 31 FPS. This resolution is the only one where the Low preset approaches a playable level, though it is still short of a smooth 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance decreases further. The Low preset averages 45 FPS. The Medium preset averages 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40 FPS. The High preset averages 26 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 25 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 20 FPS, which is a substantial 44% reduction in average frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the system is heavily taxed. The Low preset averages 33 FPS. The Medium preset averages 26 FPS, with a minimum of 22 and a maximum of 30 FPS. Both the High and Ultra presets average 19 FPS. These numbers are all well below the threshold for a playable experience, rendering this resolution impractical for this combination.

The data shows that the frame rate scaling is consistent with a GPU that is completely overwhelmed by the game's rendering demands. The difference between Low and Ultra at any given resolution is significant, but the overall performance is too low to provide a satisfactory experience at any setting. The only configuration that comes close to playable is 1080p Low, and even that falls short of the 60 FPS target.